LABH COMBINES PVT. LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 7(1),, KOLKATA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the reopening of assessment was based on information pertaining to a different financial year and assessment year, and that the AO had not applied his mind independently to the information received, thus committing a mistake repeatedly. The Tribunal cited several High Court judgments emphasizing the need for independent application of mind and tangible material for reopening.
What were the facts?
The assessee challenged the reopening of assessment for AY 2017-18, arguing it was based on incorrect information regarding unsecured loans from FY 2015-16, and that the AO did not apply his mind independently. The AO reopened the assessment based on information from the DDIT (Inv.) regarding accommodation entries and made an addition of Rs. 2,00,35,589/- as unexplained cash credit.
What were the issues?
Whether the reopening of assessment under Section 147 was valid when based on incorrect information pertaining to a different financial year and without independent application of mind by the AO.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 250,Section 147,Section 148,Section 139(1),Section 143(2),Section 142(1),Section 68,Section 132(4),Section 144B
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(5)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- ACIT v. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd.1,030 citing291 ITR 500 · 2007 · SC · Read judgment
- PCIT v. Meenakshi Overseas Pvt. Ltd.471 citing82 Taxmann.com 300 · 2017 · HC · Read judgment
- CIT v. SFIL Stock Broking Ltd.243 citing325 ITR 285 · 2010 · HC · Read judgment
- Sarthak Securities Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO217 citing329 ITR 110 · 2010 · HC
- PCIT v. Shodiman Investments (P) Ltd.80 citing93 Taxmann.com 153 · 2018 · HC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH,KOLKATA
Per Rajesh Kumar, AM
The present appeal filed by the assessee arises from order dated 06.10.2025 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter referred to as “the Act”) by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereafter referred to as “the Ld.CIT(A)].
The assessee has challenged the reopening of assessment u/s 147 of the Act by issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act on 30.03.2021 based on incorrect information received from the DDIT (In
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Utkal Highways, Bidanasi vs. Union Of INDIAOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Pradeep Kumar Behera vs. Superintendent CGST And Central Excise., CuttackOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Manas Behera vs. Commissioner, CT And GST Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Pramod Kumar Nayak vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, KendraparaOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Nirmal Kumar Sharma S/O Ram Swroop Sharma vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 16 Oct 2026